So I was taking a shower and thinking about Pathfinder (You know the usual.) with a more realistic perspective and it got me thinking about Slashing, Piercing, and Bludgeoning damage. These damages could be used in different ways with the armor as DR system. Because this is a system I enjoy using in Pathfinder, I quickly thought of multiple ways to make the 3 physical damages effective against armor in the Armor as DR system. I could not really think of one for Slashing damage but I thought of ones for bludgeoning and piercing.
Bludgeoning: Ignores armor based DR equal to half of the maximum dice damage the weapon does -1.
So in essence, 1d8 bludgeoning = ignores 3 armor, or 1d6 ignores 2, etc.
(On a crit it would double the base number so it would be 2d8 ignores 6.)
Piercing: Ignores armor based damage reduction on a critical hit, or a sneak attack.
Pretty simple, Rogue uses dagger to stab into an exposed area thus the plates don't stop the blade.
I was thinking about making slashing be stronger based on the damage you do because getting your arm broken is not nearly as bad as getting it severed, and maybe it could cause bleed damage or cause wounds that weaken the creature or something but I couldn't think of anything really good.
Thoughts? Ideas? Is it a good idea? Is it a bad idea? Is it unbalanced? I'm looking for some good suggestions because I feel this can work pretty well and make you really think about weapons before picking, for example, Earth-Breaker vs Greataxe.
so basically making armor as dr pretty much useless, why bother using that system in the 1st place if your going to make every thing bypass the dr it provides
This mechanic is not new and IIRC is part of the variant rules for 3.5.
But i don't know the variant rules all that well.
As you are dealing with a totally other kind of armor system, i like to refer you to GURPS for example, which uses a DR armor system.
BUT: Armor there is a lot higher than it is in Pathfinder or D&D. This is due to the fact, that damage dealt scales upwards faster than hit chances. So you are not scaling AC vs. to hit, but DR vs. damage dealt.
This fact would need to be applied to Pathfinder as well.
A +2 full plate armor made from Adamantium should have an armor rating of 20 or 25..not 12 like in the AC system, to provide ample protection vs. a hit from a very strong barbarian, causing 20 or more damage per hit.
So one possible solution would be, to reorganize the armor system, separating armor bonus that prevents being hit (dodge, deflection, insight etc.) and armor bonus that just reduces damage (armor, shield, NA etc.).
This makes dex chars as viable as heavily armored tanks. The first concentrates on not getting hit, the second on thick layers of protection.
Of course, you can try both to create a "mixed" class. Good dodge but also some protection in case you get hit.
It is an interesting idea, but it needs a lot of work to provide a functonal , non-game breaking system for Pathfinder.
Standard AC in Pathfinder is usually designed to stop iterative attacks, not the first attack a creature makes.
In my experience, the armor as DR rules are usually just bad. They either provide too much protection, or are worthless. At low levels it can almost complete negate damage, and at high levels the damage is so high that it's irrelevant that it blocks some, there's just too much. Couple with the fact that "defense" scores are significantly lower everyone becomes much easier to hit.
Overall the system is bad. While it's nice in theory is just doesn't actually play well with Pathfinder's other mechanics.
Kelemvor187 wrote:
BUT: Armor there is a lot higher than it is in Pathfinder or D&D. This is due to the fact, that damage dealt scales upwards faster than hit chances. So you are not scaling AC vs. to hit, but DR vs. damage dealt.
This fact would need to be applied to Pathfinder as well.
A +2 full plate armor made from Adamantium should have an armor rating of 20 or 25..not 12 like in the AC system, to provide ample protection vs. a hit from a very strong barbarian, causing 20 or more damage per hit.
Now this makes a lot of sense. I've always thought that the whole +15 to hit at level 15 was really stupid because it negates armor entirely. Having a +15 to hit plus your strength which lets say is +8. you have a +23 to hit. I'm finding 30 AC to be about average for these creatures at 15 cr. So you have to roll an 8 or higher giving a 30% miss chance with the first attack.
Now what about armor as DR.
It has a touch AC of 10. So it's Defense is 10. It has damage reduction 20/Natural Armor and 10/good. You are now dealing -30 damage against this creature unless using a good weapon, or a weapon that gets through natural armor. but you 95% hit the thing on all attacks because of it's low Defense. But if you have a +4 Vicious gory greatsword, doing 4d6+18 + 1d2 bleed. you are doing about 30 damage on average which is fully negated by the natural armor plus damage reduction.
What I think, is that if you use Armor as DR you need to rework creatures a little bit to give them slightly less Armor and slightly more defense by way of dodge, deflection, etc. which will make the fight have more chance to miss, and still do sufficient damage against creatures that are meant to be armored tanks so you feel like you're doing something.
What my friends and I came up with was only adding half of your str score to attacks (We may even make it don't add strength) which makes hitting quite a bit harder against a creature with higher defense, but because they trade high defense for lower armor they take more damage on hit.
xekratos wrote: It has damage reduction 20/Natural Armor and 10/good. You are now dealing -30 damage against this creature unless using a good weapon, or a weapon that gets through natural armor. DR Doesn't work that way. It would have DR 20 against everything except the new DR/Natural Armor type of weapons, against which it would have DR/10 unless that weapon was also good.
But that really doesn't matter. With everything else you are thinking about changing, and everything else you will have to change to accommodate that (if everything is going to dodge and deflection, ray spells from 1/2 bab casters become useless for example, spells that do hit point damage are (but don't deal with new higher touch AC are a lot better in comparison to weapons then they were) you will have an entirely new game.
This new game may be good or it may be bad, but a change this fundamental will end up requiring you to change just about everything about the system.
As noted above, DR never stacks: You only get the better value.
That being said, DR can be incredibly nasty: Our Semi-Mythic Wrath of the Righteous campaign almost came to bloody end when we encountered Our Gunslinger, Paladin, and Ninja were physically unable to do enough damage to actually hurt it, as they were all dual-wielding dexterity builds (tons of damage output, but not enough in any one hit to get past the DR), and my oracle couldn't kill it and keep the party alive at the same time (Two of the PCs were taking a lot of damage) so I had to put a barrier between it and us so we could survive.
DR, in every incarnation ever, encourages single large attacks over multiple smaller attacks: It may be somewhat realistic (many of the larger weapons in game existed in real life in order to deal with heavy armor), but it doesn't necessarily make for a particularly fun game.
See Also: Any complaint about the 'free adventure day' adventure from a couple of years ago that had an encounter with 'hardness' that only one of the provided PCs could possibly pierce.
Taja the Barbarian wrote: As noted above, DR never stacks: You only get the better value.
That being said, DR can be incredibly nasty: Our Semi-Mythic Wrath of the Righteous campaign almost came to bloody end when we encountered** spoiler omitted **Our Gunslinger, Paladin, and Ninja were physically unable to do enough damage to actually hurt it, as they were all dual-wielding dexterity builds (tons of damage output, but not enough in any one hit to get past the DR), and my oracle couldn't kill it and keep the party alive at the same time (Two of the PCs were taking a lot of damage) so I had to put a barrier between it and us so we could survive.
DR, in every incarnation ever, encourages single large attacks over multiple smaller attacks: It may be somewhat realistic (many of the larger weapons in game existed in real life in order to deal with heavy armor), but it doesn't necessarily make for a particularly fun game.
See Also: Any complaint about the 'free adventure day' adventure from a couple of years ago that had an encounter with 'hardness' that only one of the provided PCs could possibly pierce.
I recommend your Gunslinger take Clustered Shots.
Claxon wrote: Standard AC in Pathfinder is usually designed to stop iterative attacks, not the first attack a creature makes.
In my experience, the armor as DR rules are usually just bad. They either provide too much protection, or are worthless. At low levels it can almost complete negate damage, and at high levels the damage is so high that it's irrelevant that it blocks some, there's just too much. Couple with the fact that "defense" scores are significantly lower everyone becomes much easier to hit.
Overall the system is bad. While it's nice in theory is just doesn't actually play well with Pathfinder's other mechanics.
Yeah, the optional Pathfinder system for Armor as DR from Ultimate Combat doesn't work. You have to combine Armor DR with a "Defense" system, coupling AC to skill (level) instead or in conjunction with actual armor. Gear it to favor light fighters with little to no armor avoiding most attacks, and heavy infantry with heavy armor absorbing most attacks.
Allows true "swashbuckling" while giving a great reason to wear armor.
It touches on many things and bonuses, and is no mean feat; but pulling it off would be a master stroke.
Claxon wrote: Standard AC in Pathfinder is usually designed to stop iterative attacks, not the first attack a creature makes.
In my experience, the armor as DR rules are usually just bad. They either provide too much protection, or are worthless. At low levels it can almost complete negate damage, and at high levels the damage is so high that it's irrelevant that it blocks some, there's just too much. Couple with the fact that "defense" scores are significantly lower everyone becomes much easier to hit.
Overall the system is bad. While it's nice in theory is just doesn't actually play well with Pathfinder's other mechanics.
I've to agree with Claxon here.
Pathfinder is not designed to integrate a DR based armor system. You need a complex system to make it work, and Pathfinder, while rules heavy, is by no means detailed enough to handle such an adaptation.
You not only have to find the right balance between DR vs. damage but also make it possible to use hit locations and other means to reduce the protection (for example damage types and armor that provides different protection values against different kinds of damage).
If you look up RPG-systems that uses DR in that fashion you will see that they are either extremly simple (DR vs. damage no matter what damage type) or extremly detailed (hit locations, DR that protects well vs. some kinds of damage and not so well vs. other kinds etc.). There is little in between.
Due to the fact that Pathfinder is rules heavy, a simple system won't do. You need a complex one, which is a lot of work. Again, i refer you to GURPS, which uses, in my opinion, a very well designed DR-armor system.
Thank you all for your input. My quest for making Armor as DR work has furthered thanks to all your criticism. I will continue trying to homebrew armor as Dr for pathfinder and hope that someday will make it work. People have suggested GURP's armor as DR system and I will be sure to check it out to see why it works and maybe can hash up some conjoined GURPs Pathfinder armor system.
Kelemvor187 wrote: Claxon wrote: Standard AC in Pathfinder is usually designed to stop iterative attacks, not the first attack a creature makes.
In my experience, the armor as DR rules are usually just bad. They either provide too much protection, or are worthless. At low levels it can almost complete negate damage, and at high levels the damage is so high that it's irrelevant that it blocks some, there's just too much. Couple with the fact that "defense" scores are significantly lower everyone becomes much easier to hit.
Overall the system is bad. While it's nice in theory is just doesn't actually play well with Pathfinder's other mechanics.
I've to agree with Claxon here.
Pathfinder is not designed to integrate a DR based armor system. You need a complex system to make it work, and Pathfinder, while rules heavy, is by no means detailed enough to handle such an adaptation.
You not only have to find the right balance between DR vs. damage but also make it possible to use hit locations and other means to reduce the protection (for example damage types and armor that provides different protection values against different kinds of damage).
If you look up RPG-systems that uses DR in that fashion you will see that they are either extremly simple (DR vs. damage no matter what damage type) or extremly detailed (hit locations, DR that protects well vs. some kinds of damage and not so well vs. other kinds etc.). There is little in between.
Due to the fact that Pathfinder is rules heavy, a simple system won't do. You need a complex one, which is a lot of work. Again, i refer you to GURPS, which uses, in my opinion, a very well designed DR-armor system. I mostly agree. I will say that I think scaling is the crux of the problem as Claxon more or less mentioned. Specifically the scaling of damage vs dr staying the same. If the damage didn't scale it would be much easier to make a viable armour as dr system.
The big problem is that damage scales way faster than the DR does (from Ultimate Combat's suggested system), I agree Lemartes.
The DR does scale, but I believe it's only +1 per 4 or 5 levels.
See it's been so long that I've read it I thought it didn't scale at all.
Scaling dr makes little sense to me. Scaling damage is also a bit nonsense as well. Not saying that would make for a fun game though. So not starting that argument.
To be clear if neither scaled there would be less issues with making it a viable system.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
DR thats less than 1/2 character level is not useful. Generally it feels like once the DR starts to exceed 1/2 character level it breaks the bell curve pretty badly.
When my investigator started putting ablative barrier on the invulnerable rager things got out of hand for his survival rate pretty quickly.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
It has other funny shenanigans, like walking an entire corridor perfectly safe because 200 individual darts couldn't surpass the DR. Anyway OP, good luck with that idea, and I really mean it.
I tried once to give more variety on the defensive properties in every armor of the game and ended up frustrated.
I.E.:
Leather armor:
- Armor class//
+2 vs slashing +3 vs bludgeoning +1 vs piercing
- Special properties//
+1 against electric based saving throws or DR 2 against electric direct damage
-2 vs fire based saving throws (masterwork and magic armor loses this flaw)
As you can see, I was VERY bored that time.
xekratos wrote: Thank you all for your input. My quest for making Armor as DR work has furthered thanks to all your criticism. I will continue trying to homebrew armor as Dr for pathfinder and hope that someday will make it work. People have suggested GURP's armor as DR system and I will be sure to check it out to see why it works and maybe can hash up some conjoined GURPs Pathfinder armor system. GURPS in a good system, but it's strength lies in the fact that PCs don't get hit very often. GURPS has active defenses based on skills; every attack is an opposed roll. You "miss" a lot, but when you hit, oh boy. The various types of weapon figure into it, as well. Slashing, and piercing do multiples of what gets through armor.
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better.
Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better. I think this is true for most systems ;)
In most systems it is hard to absorb damage completely.
Not getting hit is often the best survival strategy.
Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better. I think this is true for most systems ;)
In most systems it is hard to absorb damage completely.
Not getting hit is often the best survival strategy. True, but in GURPS, getting hit hard with penetrating damage in a vital area, with insufficient armor, is pretty much instant death. And that's if you're a starting PC with the typical 100 point build, or a veteran conqueror with 600 character points. Still dead. Of course, the 600 point conqueror is REALLY hard to hit...
Can'tFindthePath wrote: Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better. I think this is true for most systems ;)
In most systems it is hard to absorb damage completely.
Not getting hit is often the best survival strategy. True, but in GURPS, getting hit hard with penetrating damage in a vital area, with insufficient armor, is pretty much instant death. And that's if you're a starting PC with the typical 100 point build, or a veteran conqueror with 600 character points. Still dead. Of course, the 600 point conqueror is REALLY hard to hit... True, but i think this is how it should be.
20 soldiers fire at you with longbows in Pathfinder and because you have 120 HP you will survive at least 10-20 normal hits with full combat readiness intact which is pretty unrealistic ;)
With 20 arrors stuck in your body, you would look like a pincushion.
This would be difficult to accomplish in GURPS with hitpoints.
BUT: Pathfinder is more a gamistic system, while GURPS strongly leans towards consistancy and realism. So these systems are hard to compare, because the approach is totally different.
Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote: Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better. I think this is true for most systems ;)
In most systems it is hard to absorb damage completely.
Not getting hit is often the best survival strategy. True, but in GURPS, getting hit hard with penetrating damage in a vital area, with insufficient armor, is pretty much instant death. And that's if you're a starting PC with the typical 100 point build, or a veteran conqueror with 600 character points. Still dead. Of course, the 600 point conqueror is REALLY hard to hit... True, but i think this is how it should be.
20 soldiers fire at you with longbows in Pathfinder and because you have 120 HP you will survive at least 10-20 normal hits with full combat readiness intact which is pretty unrealistic ;)
With 20 arrors stuck in your body, you would look like a pincushion.
This would be difficult to accomplish in GURPS with hitpoints.
BUT: Pathfinder is more a gamistic system, while GURPS strongly leans towards consistancy and realism. So these systems are hard to compare, because the approach is totally different. Oh, I agree; that IS how it should be. But, everyone has to have the right mindset to enjoy it. Not only the lethality, but missing most of the time. The successful hits versus a challenging opponent are far fewer in GURPS than in most systems.
Regarding the pincushion: the abstract nature of hit points means that every "hit" is not necessarily a solid penetrating injury. Otherwise, every combat in the game above 5th level would look silly, and destroy verisimilitude. In your example, probably 15 hits are near misses as our hero throws himself to the ground, and rolls into a defensive crouch. The next two or three hits are more telling, and the last couple arrows might be sticking through him somewhere non-vital.
When I GM, I describe most hits as near misses, and the strain of not getting filleted. I describe crits as actual wounds, gauged against how many hit points the target has. And the last couple hits are the ones that lay open. I also use the bloodied condition from D&D 4E to describe the state of combatants. It isn't tied to any mechanics at present, but it let's you know when someone is at half hp or less, without a heal check.
The trouble with "HP mean 'damage' is mostly near misses" is that there are plenty of special effects that trigger on a hit.
Why do I need to make a Fortitude save against poisoned arrows that miss? Why is it more tiring to dodge a shocking arrow than a non-electrified one? Why does fire resistance make it less tiring to dodge flaming swords? Etc...
The system assumes, in lots of places, that if an attack hits your AC and does damage that it draws blood.
Can'tFindthePath wrote: Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote: Kelemvor187 wrote: Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Armor is life....but not getting hit is even better. I think this is true for most systems ;)
In most systems it is hard to absorb damage completely.
Not getting hit is often the best survival strategy. True, but in GURPS, getting hit hard with penetrating damage in a vital area, with insufficient armor, is pretty much instant death. And that's if you're a starting PC with the typical 100 point build, or a veteran conqueror with 600 character points. Still dead. Of course, the 600 point conqueror is REALLY hard to hit... True, but i think this is how it should be.
20 soldiers fire at you with longbows in Pathfinder and because you have 120 HP you will survive at least 10-20 normal hits with full combat readiness intact which is pretty unrealistic ;)
With 20 arrors stuck in your body, you would look like a pincushion.
This would be difficult to accomplish in GURPS with hitpoints.
BUT: Pathfinder is more a gamistic system, while GURPS strongly leans towards consistancy and realism. So these systems are hard to compare, because the approach is totally different. Oh, I agree; that IS how it should be. But, everyone has to have the right mindset to enjoy it. Not only the lethality, but missing most of the time. The successful hits versus a challenging opponent are far fewer in GURPS than in most systems.
Regarding the pincushion: the abstract nature of hit points means that every "hit" is not necessarily a solid penetrating injury. Otherwise, every combat in the game above 5th level would look silly, and destroy verisimilitude. In your example, probably 15 hits are near misses as our hero throws himself to the ground, and rolls into a defensive crouch. The next two or three hits are more telling, and the last couple arrows might be sticking through him somewhere non-vital.
When I GM, I describe most hits as near misses, and the strain of not getting... you forget that there is at least some appeal to playing a character that can just shrug off most attacks in that most things hit them but they just don't cause damage like the juggernaut, hulk or superman the appeal for high durability as a trope in games and fantasy alike is still very much a thing
I'm sorry i brought up the HP-discussion :)
This was not my intend.
Even Gygax admitted, that HP is more like "fatigue" and is only there to make the outcome more predictable and offer time to flee if necessary.
I have to admit that i'm not really fond of the HP system. I prefer the realism of GURPS (fixed low amount of HP that does not change significantly), but it's hard to find a group that appreciates this level of consistancy and complexity, so Pathfinder it is :)
So back to the topic:
DR-based armor for Pathfinder will be hard to accomplish. I wish the OP luck!
The old 3.X Unearthed Arcana had armor as DR that simply cut your armor bonus in half and turned it into DR.
For example, if you would normally have a +6 armor bonus from Chainmail you now have a +3 armor bonus and DR 3. Enhancement added only to AC, so +3 Chainmail gave +6 armor and DR 3. Rounding favored AC, a +5 bonus became +3 armor and 2 DR.
How it actually worked in play is anyone's guess, but it was simple to administer. Someone with more energy than me could run some numbers about whether average damage per round changes much and in which direction.
|
